It's had 322 votes so far which is a lot for one of my polls. And it was pretty ambiguous in its intent, partly due to Twitter's length limits and my own sloppiness. Some notes follow.#
The two examples should have represented the same date-time.#
The first example was created by the JavaScript function d.toLocaleString (), where d is a date value. I am in the US, so it produced an American localization. In Europe it would have done it in their preferred order, 30/8/2019 etc. #
The first example didn't include a time zone, even though the format provides for that possibility.#
Perhaps a better choice would be d.toString (), which would return a string like this. Fri Aug 30 2019 17:37:33 GMT-0400 (EDT). Imho that's human-readable and of course it's also unambigously machine-readable. #
Net-net: your OS knows how to convert all these strings unambiguously to your language's internal date representation. The argument that one is more efficient for machines is incorrect. They all work equally well. #
The point of the poll was this: If you have a choice, the format that both a machine and a human can easily read is obviously the best choice. #